https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1970619
--- Comment #3 from Ben Beasley code@musicinmybrain.net ---
The azure-common package is required by the most amount of SDK libraries, so we could have the base azure directory owned by this package. Would that work?
It would work, although it seems like you would have to introduce some otherwise-unnecessary artificial dependencies on this package.
One way to avoid pulling in the full contents of this (admittedly small package) to create a directory would be to create a -filesystem package; that seems overkill for only one directory.
I think the approach of co-owning any namespace directories would work well here. That ought to just need this added:
# Co-owned namespace package directory %dir %{python3_sitelib}/azure
in the %files section of every package that installs something directly into the azure directory.
-----
The packaging guidelines have more general information about directory ownership (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_file_and_directo..., https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/UnownedDirectories...), and there was a discussion specifically about the nuances of Python namespace packages and directory ownership not too long ago (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@lists.fedoraproject....).